By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Aielyn on 07 December 2012
Edit Thread

gergroy said:
Most of the stories and quotes that come up is because Pachter is one of two primary analysts that look at the game industry.  As such, the gaming journalist are always asking for his opinion on what he thinks of something.  Now, Pachter is not a gamer, he is an analyst, so a lot of what he says is pretty condesending which seems to upset a lot of gamers. 

He says stuff like Call of Duty's story sucks, and Nintendo is failing.  However, people don't seem to understand that isn't saying Nintendo isn't delivering a great gaming experience, he is talking about Nintendo's ability to provide profits.  Sony and Microsoft are large companies that have a lot of things going for them besides games.  Nintendo is just games, as such the emergence of smartphones and mobile gaming will have a much bigger impact on their profit performance than the other two companies.

These statements then get taken and put in articles, often out of context, and it pisses off gamers.  My point is that Pachter isn't talking to gamers, his work involves previewing stock performance of game companies.  He isn't right all the time, he is often wrong, but that doesn't mean we need to ban his comments.  How many people on this site make bad predictions all the time?  Should we ban people that make bad preditions now?  His comments create discussion, that is the point of these forums, to discuss.

Also, Pachter does admit all the time when he is wrong, and definitely admits errors, those apoligies aren't gaming news though...

Personally, I like Jesse Divinich better, but I'll still look at what Pachter says.

If you guys want to understand Pachter a little better, here is a link to an interview he did way back when.  It probably won't make you like him any better, as he is pretty condescending towards games, but you will better understand that he is mostly just focused on how the companies and products perform, rather than how they play.

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/being-michael-pachter-interview

If what you say about Pachter here is true, and what he says publicly is his real analysis, then it means that Pachter is absolutely atrocious as an analyst. Why do I say this? Because his analysis is his product, the thing he sells, and the only reason to give it out publicly for free is if nobody considers it worth paying for.

So in the end, that's the question for you to think about: WHY is he making his "analyses" public?

And for the record, he is not one of only two analysts looking at the game industry, he's one of only two that make PUBLIC any sort of analysis (and even then, there's a few more that do some public release, like Anita Frazier - but she speaks of numbers in her public info, not speculation).

And no, Pachter doesn't admit wrongness. Note that I'm not talking about the results, but the analyses that he purportedly provides. He will admit that he was wrong about, for instance, Nintendo releasing a Wii HD in 2009... but he was wrong because Nintendo made a bad decision not to release it, not because he misread the situation. It wasn't his fault, Nintendo didn't act sensibly... that's the sort of "I was wrong" that you get from him.

So I'll say it again - if you assume competence from Pachter, then either he's acting as a PR guy for some company by releasing FUD analyses, or he's moonlighting for money by making outlandish claims for clicks. If you can provide another explanation for why he's wrong far more than he's right, never admits to a flaw in the analysis itself, continues to be employed by an analysis company, and yet releases large amounts of "analysis" publicly, then I'm all ears.